Suppr超能文献

盆腔淋巴结清扫术后行腹膜后引流与不引流对预防妇科恶性肿瘤患者淋巴囊肿形成的比较

Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in patients with gynaecological malignancies.

作者信息

Charoenkwan Kittipat, Kietpeerakool Chumnan

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, 110 Intawaroros Road, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 50200.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jun 4;2014(6):CD007387. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007387.pub3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 1, 2010. Pelvic lymphadenectomy is associated with significant complications including lymphocyst formation and related morbidities. Retroperitoneal drainage using suction drains has been recommended as a method to prevent such complications. However, this policy has been challenged by the findings from recent studies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy on lymphocyst formation and related morbidities in gynaecological cancer patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2013, Issue 12) in The Cochrane Library, electronic databases MEDLINE (Nov Week 3, 2013), EMBASE (2014, week 1), and the citation lists of relevant publications. The latest searches were performed on 10 January 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effect of retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy in gynaecological cancer patients. Retroperitoneal drainage was defined as placement of passive or active suction drains in pelvic retroperitoneal spaces. No drainage was defined as no placement of passive or active suction drains in pelvic retroperitoneal spaces.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed studies using methodological quality criteria. For dichotomous data, we calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We examined continuous data using mean difference (MD) and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

Since the last version of this review, no new studies have been identified for inclusion. The review included four studies with 571 participants. Considering the short-term outcomes (within four weeks after surgery), retroperitoneal drainage was associated with a comparable rate of overall lymphocyst formation when all methods of pelvic peritoneum management were considered together (two studies, 204 patients; RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.04 to 13.35). When the pelvic peritoneum was left open, the rates of overall lymphocyst formation (one study, 110 patients; RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.79) and symptomatic lymphocyst formation (one study, 137 patients; RR 3.25, 95% CI 1.26 to 8.37) were higher in the drained group. At 12 months after surgery, the rates of overall lymphocyst formation were comparable between the groups (one study, 232 patients; RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.45). However, there was a trend toward increased risk of symptomatic lymphocyst formation in the group with drains (one study, 232 patients; RR 7.12, 95% CI 0.89 to 56.97). The included trials were of low to moderate risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Placement of retroperitoneal tube drains has no benefit in prevention of lymphocyst formation after pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with gynaecological malignancies. When the pelvic peritoneum is left open, the tube drain placement is associated with a higher risk of short and long-term symptomatic lymphocyst formation.

摘要

背景

这是2010年第1期发表的原始Cochrane系统评价的更新版本。盆腔淋巴结清扫术会引发包括淋巴囊肿形成及相关发病情况在内的严重并发症。推荐采用负压引流进行腹膜后引流以预防此类并发症。然而,近期研究结果对这一策略提出了质疑。

目的

评估盆腔淋巴结清扫术后腹膜后引流与不引流对妇科癌症患者淋巴囊肿形成及相关发病情况的影响。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane妇科癌症专业注册库、Cochrane图书馆中的Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL 2013年第12期)、电子数据库MEDLINE(2013年第3周)、EMBASE(2014年第1周)以及相关出版物的参考文献列表。最新检索于2014年1月10日进行。

入选标准

比较妇科癌症患者盆腔淋巴结清扫术后腹膜后引流与不引流效果的随机对照试验(RCT)。腹膜后引流定义为在盆腔腹膜后间隙放置被动或主动负压引流管。不引流定义为不在盆腔腹膜后间隙放置被动或主动负压引流管。

数据收集与分析

我们采用方法学质量标准评估研究。对于二分法数据,我们计算风险比(RRs)和95%置信区间(CIs)。我们使用平均差(MD)和95%CI检验连续数据。

主要结果

自本系统评价的上一版本以来,未发现新的纳入研究。该系统评价纳入了四项研究,共571名参与者。考虑短期结局(术后四周内),当综合考虑所有盆腔腹膜处理方法时,腹膜后引流与总体淋巴囊肿形成率相当(两项研究,204名患者;RR 0.76,95%CI 0.04至13.35)。当盆腔腹膜敞开时,引流组的总体淋巴囊肿形成率(一项研究,110名患者;RR 2.29,95%CI 1.38至3.79)和有症状淋巴囊肿形成率(一项研究,137名患者;RR 3.25,95%CI 1.26至8.37)更高。术后12个月时,两组的总体淋巴囊肿形成率相当(一项研究,232名患者;RR 1.48,95%CI 0.89至2.45)。然而,引流组有症状淋巴囊肿形成风险有增加趋势(一项研究,232名患者;RR 7.12,95%CI 0.89至56.97)。纳入的试验存在低至中度偏倚风险。

作者结论

对于妇科恶性肿瘤患者,盆腔淋巴结清扫术后放置腹膜后引流管对预防淋巴囊肿形成并无益处。当盆腔腹膜敞开时,放置引流管与短期和长期有症状淋巴囊肿形成的较高风险相关。

相似文献

4
Lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial cancer.用于子宫内膜癌治疗的淋巴结切除术。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Oct 2;10(10):CD007585. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007585.pub4.
5
Lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial cancer.子宫内膜癌治疗中的淋巴结切除术
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Sep 21;2015(9):CD007585. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007585.pub3.
7
Prophylactic abdominal drainage for pancreatic surgery.胰腺手术的预防性腹腔引流
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 21;6(6):CD010583. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010583.pub4.
8
Prophylactic abdominal drainage for pancreatic surgery.胰腺手术的预防性腹腔引流
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 21;10(10):CD010583. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010583.pub3.
9
Lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial cancer.子宫内膜癌治疗中的淋巴结切除术
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20(1):CD007585. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007585.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Laparoscopic approach for symptomatic pelvic and para-aortic lymphoceles.腹腔镜治疗有症状的盆腔及腹主动脉旁淋巴管囊肿。
J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2022 Mar 8;23(1):60-62. doi: 10.4274/jtgga.galenos.2021.2021.0028. Epub 2021 Jun 10.
6
Wound drainage for lower limb arterial surgery.下肢动脉手术的伤口引流
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 11;11(11):CD011111. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011111.pub2.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验